Some Pictures

Let's take a break from the monotony of our rants and musings about the news media. Here are a few pictures from our recent trip to South America.


All these pictures were taken at a place called Petropolis near Rio de Janeiro in Brazil.

Let's hope Brazil wins the World Cup! If they don't, let it be Argentina!!

Left High and Dry By P.T.I. ?

Today we read this article in Kannada Prabha. Here is what it says in the first two lines:

ನವದೆಹಲಿ: ೧೯೯೯ರ ಲೋಕಸಭಾ ಚುನಾವಣೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಗೆದ್ದ ಅಭ್ಯರ್ಥಿಗಳು ನಿಗದಿತ ಮಿತಿಗಿಂತ ಸರಾಸರಿ ಸುಮಾರು ೩೦ ಪಟ್ಟಿಗಿಂತಲೂ ಅಧಿಕ ಹಣ ವೆಚ್ಚ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ ಎಂದು ವಿಶ್ವ ಬ್ಯಾಂಕ್ ಹೇಳಿದೆ.
ಅಭ್ಯರ್ಥಿಗಳ ಚುನಾವಣಾ ವೆಚ್ಚಕ್ಕೆ ೨,೫೦,೦೦೦ ರು. ಮಿತಿ ನಿಗದಿಪಡಿಸಲಾಗಿತ್ತು. ಆದರೆ, ಗೆದ್ದ ಅಭ್ಯರ್ಥಿಗಳು ಸುಮಾರು ೮೩ ಲಕ್ಷ ರು.ನಷ್ಟು ಹಣ ಖರ್ಚು ಮಾಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ ಎಂದು ವಿಶ್ವ ಬ್ಯಾಂಕ್ ತನ್ನ 'ಭಾರತೀಯ ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕ ಸೇವೆ ಸುಧಾರಣೆ- ಯಶಸ್ಸಿನಿಂದ ಪಾಠ' ಎಂಬ ವರದಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ತಿಳಿಸಿದೆ.

The question is, does the World Bank Report really say that "೧೯೯೯ರ ಲೋಕಸಭಾ ಚುನಾವಣೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಗೆದ್ದ ಅಭ್ಯರ್ಥಿಗಳು ನಿಗದಿತ ಮಿತಿಗಿಂತ ಸರಾಸರಿ ಸುಮಾರು ೩೦ ಪಟ್ಟಿಗಿಂತಲೂ ಅಧಿಕ ಹಣ ವೆಚ್ಚ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ." ?

No. It does not. We actually read that report. You too can read it here.

So, what does it say? Here is what it says about the spending:

While campaign ceilings for a Lok Sabha seat have been re-pegged at Rs.25 lakhs, the average winner spent approximately Rs.83 lakhs inthe 1999 Parliamentary elections.

It does not say anything about "30 ಪಟ್ಟು" or any "ಪಟ್ಟು". So how did Kannada Prabha arrive at that figure? We don't know. We can only guess.

It appears that the Rs. 25 lakhs in the World Bank report has erroneously become Rs. 2.5 lakhs in the Kannada Prabha report. This simple error has further been compounded by the assumption that Rs.2.5 lakhs was the mandated spending limit for the 1999 elections. Since, 83 lakhs actual spending is about 30 times that of 2.5 lakhs, it is reported as "30 ಪಟ್ಟು". (Please note, this is just a guess on our part. We really do not know where that "30 times" came from. It certainly is not there in the WB Report.)

Actually, the Rs. 25 lakh that is cited in the World Bank report is not the spending limit for 1999 elections. As the WB Report states, that figure is after "re-pegging". And it was done in 2003 for the 2004 election. The 1999 spending limit was about Rs. 15 lakhs. So, the Kannada Prabha report is incorrect on following counts:

• First of all the World Bank did not say "೧೯೯೯ರ ಲೋಕಸಭಾ ಚುನಾವಣೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಗೆದ್ದ ಅಭ್ಯರ್ಥಿಗಳು ನಿಗದಿತ ಮಿತಿಗಿಂತ ಸರಾಸರಿ ಸುಮಾರು ೩೦ ಪಟ್ಟಿಗಿಂತಲೂ ಅಧಿಕ ಹಣ ವೆಚ್ಚ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ"
• Second, the World Bank did not say "ಅಭ್ಯರ್ಥಿಗಳ ಚುನಾವಣಾ ವೆಚ್ಚಕ್ಕೆ ೨,೫೦,೦೦೦ ರು. ಮಿತಿ ನಿಗದಿಪಡಿಸಲಾಗಿತ್ತು." Instead, it says "campaign ceilings for a Lok Sabha seat have been re-pegged at Rs.25 lakhs". As mentioned earlier, this re-pegging happened after the 1999 elections.

• If we use the 1999 ceilings of Rs.15 lakh spending limit, the actual money spent of Rs.83 lakhs is only about 5 times more. Not 30 times.

Why are we blaming P.T.I. for this? Because, it appears it's a P.T.I. story even though Kannada Prabha fails to credit it.

We found the same story appearing in Mumbai Mirror. Yes, it has the same error. However, the Mirror takes care to credit the story to P.T.I. Here are the same lines from Mumbai Mirror:

New Delhi: Winning candidates on an average spent over 30 times the stipulated amount for a Lok Sabha seat in the 1999 general election in India, says a World Bank report.

While the campaign ceiling for a Lok Sabha seat has been re-pegged at Rs 2,50,000, the average winner spent about Rs 83,00,000 in the 1999 parliamentary election, said the report "Reforming Public Services in India — Drawing Lessons from Success".

We really do not understand this failure to credit where the credit is due. Actually in this case blame is due.

Is that it? Not by any chance.

Further in the story while discussing about Muti-Party System Vs. Two-Party system, as per Kannada Prabha, the WB report said that "ದ್ವಿಪಕ್ಷೀಯ ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥೆ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದು."

Is the WB Report as unequivocal about the Two-Party System as Kannada Prabha states? Does the report really say "ದ್ವಿಪಕ್ಷೀಯ ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥೆ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದು."? The answers are actually, "No" and "No".

So, what does the report actually say about Multi-Party System Vs. Two-Party System?

It indeed discusses the benefits of a Two-Party System (as opposed to a Multi-Party one) at some length. But it does not declare that the Two-Party System is "ಒಳ್ಳೆಯದು". In fact, the authors of the report take enough care to write the following:

"On the other hand, multi-party systems may disrupt collusive tendencies among dominant parties andprovide more space for citizen voice. More research is needed to understand the effects of two-party and multi-party systems on public service delivery."

Interestingly the Mumbai Mirror version of the PTI story does not have what Kannada Prabha has in this context. It does not say anything about the Two-Party System. All it says is:

The [World Bank] report attributed the staggering expenses to the growth of the multi-party system in India. "The growth of multi-party competition in tight races has encouraged a free-for-all to outspend opponents to win," it said.

A simple question: Do we get the right picture about the WB Report by reading the Kannada Prabha report?

Decide for you yourselves.

Tail Piece: The WB Report is pretty interesting. The issues that are discussed in that are quite educative. Please go and read that. If you are a journo, I am sure there is more than one story to report there. Definitely a more interesting story than the one about Indian politicos spending more than the mandated limit in their election campaigns.

Kannada Prabha Is Paper Number One!

Based on Google Trends, in our previous post we wondered whether Prajavani is the "Paper Number 1" among Kannada news papers as far as Interenet is concerned.

While Google Trends provide some idea about the searches being done on Google, it seems there is a better way to measure the Internet traffic. One of our readers wrote the following:

Dear Sanjaya,
On Internet KannadaPrabha is No.1. The graphs you have shown from google trend - beta service is of not much significance. Infact, if you want to take fairly relaiable ranking you should use alexa as a standard service.

According alexa Page rankings for Kannada Dailies are as under:

Kannada Prabha - 64,138
Prajavani - 109,735
Sanjevani - 126,051
Udayavani - 1,645,940
Vijaya Karnataka - No Data
Samyukta Karnataka - No Data

We thank our anonymous reader for providing us this information.

Prajavani - Paper Number 1 ?!!

In terms of print circulation, Vijaya Karnataka is the "Paper Number 1" of Kannada newspaper field. This has been the case for a few years now.

Does it retain the same spot on the 'Net? We don't know. We are not sure if any stats are available in this regard.

However, we can tell you one thing. More people search for "Prajavani" on Google than any other Kannada newspaper. As per Google Trends, Prajavani beats both Vijaya Karnataka and Kannada Prabha hands down at present.

But why?! Readership demographics? Prajavani's relatively longer presence on the 'Net?


Among the Khan trio of Bollywood who is most sought after? Find out for yourself by doing you know what here. Notice that Morocco trends towards Shah Rukh unlike most other countries? No surprise there. We already knew about that by reading Sriram's English blog. Money quote:

It was heartwarming to see some Moroccan kids claiming that their hearts were Indian. Shah Rukh Khan was a passport for all houses and there were none that had not seen at least one Shah Rukh movie. No, Aamir, Salman, Saif did not feature in the list.

Now for the all important question. Kareena Or Priyanka? The answer is here.

Water Cooler Talk At Churumuri

If you are interested to read something interesting about Kannada journalism and journos, do drop in here and read the comments section. The talk there is not always illuminative. At times it is even vulgur. But at all times it is quite interesting. We learnt a good bit of information from there.
(Our thanks to Subhash for sending us the link.)

Disclosure: Our blog makes a "You Blink, You'll Miss It" appearance there.

Is the situation really that bleak?

Dear Readers,

All through our short existance, we have complained about errors -- factual or otherwise -- in the newspapers that we read. But, we have never lost our hope. We have wondered at times about these errors, but have generally stayed away from making any blanket statement and wholesale indictments of our journalists. Yet, based on the reactions we have seen in the comment section, many are upset.

Now, in his column, writing about the acquisition of Vijaya Karnataka by the Times of India group, here is what Ravi Belagere has to say:

"ಬೇರೆ ಯಾವ ಸಬ್ಜೆಕ್ಟಿನಲ್ಲೂ ಸೀಟು ಸಿಗದ ಅನೇಕರು ಯಾಂತ್ರಿಕವಾಗಿ ಪತ್ರಿಕೋದ್ಯಮದಲ್ಲಿ ಎಂ.ಎ., ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಅಷ್ಟಿಷ್ಟು ತಿಳಿದುಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಪತ್ರಿಕೋದ್ಯಮದ ಚಾರ್ಮ್ ಕಂಡು, ಹೆಸರು-ಅಹಂಕಾರ ಗಳಿಸಲೆಂದು ಪತ್ರಿಕೋದ್ಯಮಕ್ಕೆ ಬಂದು ಬಿಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಅಂಥವರಿಂದ ನೀವು ಯಾವ ತೆರನಾದ ಬರಹ ಬರೆಸಬಲ್ಲಿರಿ? ಪತ್ರಿಕೋದ್ಯಮಿಗಳು ನೋಡಿದರೆ ಇಂಥವರು : ಧಣಿಗಳು ನೋಡಿದರೆ ಅಂಥವರು. ಇನ್ನು ಓದುಗರ ಪರವಾಗಿ ನಿಂತು ಮಾತನಾಡುವವರು ಯಾರು?

ನನ್ನಂಥ ಅನೇಕರನ್ನು ಕಾಡುತ್ತಿರುವ ಚಿಂತೆ ಅದು. ವ್ಯಥೆ ಕೂಡ."

Whoa...!

While we don't always agree with Mr.Belagere, we know that he speaks what's in his mind. And, what he says here are pretty strong words. And indeed sad, if it's true.

The question is : Is the situation really that bleak?

We hope not.

Kannada Prabha: Last In Translation?

[Without a note of irony some one criticised us by saying "criticising is easy". In that spirit, we are going for easy criticisms here. We really like it easy.]

Just the other day we mentioned about Kannada Prabha's creative translation of Singer's Nobel speech. Today we saw some more.

Here is TJS George's article in English. And here is the version as translated by Kannada Prabha.

In his article, George mentions about a political play "The New Statesman, Episode 2006. The Blair B'stard Project.", for some reason, in the Kannada translation it becomes 'ದ ನ್ಯೂ ಸ್ಟೇಟ್ಸ್‌ಮನ್, ಎಪಿಸೋಡ್ ೨೦೦೬ (ಹೊಸ ರಾಜನೀತಿಜ್ಞ, ಅಧ್ಯಾಯ ೨೦೦೬) -'ಬ್ಲೇರ್ -ಬುಷ್ ತಾರಾ ಅಭಿನಯ ಯೋಜನೆ'

Later in his article, George mentions about "Hundreds of murderers, rapists and thieves escaped from some of Britain's open prisons ". But Kannada Prabha translates it as "ನೂರಾರು ಮಂದಿ ಕೊಲೆಗಡುಕರು, ವ್ಯಭಿಚಾರಿಗಳು, ಕಳ್ಳಕಾಕರು ಬ್ರಿಟನ್ನಿನ ಕೆಲ ಬಯಲು ಬಂದೀಖಾನೆಗಳಿಂದ ಪರಾರಿಯಾದರು." I do hope that the good folks at Kannada Prabha know the difference between "rape" and "ವ್ಯಭಿಚಾರ".

While the word "escape" could some times be translated as "ಪರಾರಿ", not in this case. "ಪರಾರಿ" changes the meaning entirely. It implies that these criminals ran away. But the fact is, they were allowed to walk free after completing their sentences.

The "escape" here is not about running away from open prisons, but about serving the sentence and then being allowed to walk free instead of being deported to their native countries. (In fairness to K.P., we have to mention that the next setence in the article makes context a bit more clear. But, not clear enough.)

There are something else about this article. No, they are not about Kannada Prabha's abilities (or lack of them) of translations.

While on the topic of the political play, George writes about the "anger of the playwright and of those who flock to see the show.". The fact is, the play is a satire. Even a farce. If the playwright is any good, those who flock to see should see the British Prime Minister Blair as an object of ridicule rather than one of anger.

In his article, George mentions about the "mutiny" of British Civil Servants and about the freeing of thousands of foreign criminals who should have been considered for deportation. If one reads George's article they appear to be two separate events, both undermining Tony Blair's credibility. Note that in George's telling the "mutiny" is mentioned first and then the freeing of the criminals.

But, the fact is, as reported here in the Daily Mail, the head of the Civil Servant's association's "mutiny" seems to have been at least as a reaction to the criminal freeing fiasco.

Do any of these matter? We say, decide for yourselves.

ಕನ್ನಡ ಪ್ರಭದಲ್ಲಿ ಭೂತ ಚೇಷ್ಟೆ?!

On May 17th Sriram of ಕನ್ನಡವೇ ನಿತ್ಯ posted an article about Kannada nationalism in his blog. (We at 108 Sullu World H.Q. fully encourage you to read it. It sure is different from all the chest thumping rhetoric we generally get to read.)

Sriram ended that article with the Kannada translation of a part of the speech given by Isaac Bashevis Singer, the well known Yiddish writer.

It sure is an interesting speech. Especially the parts Sriram translates and quotes in his blog post.

What is more interesting -- to us at least -- is the fact that on June 4th, Kannada Prabha published the same exact speech. The one difference being, while Sriram uses only the portion that's relevant to his article, Kannada Prabha quotes almost the entire speech. (You can read the Kannada Prabha version here.)

Consider this. Singer gave this speech in 1978. He has been dead for a long time. (1991) It is not like this speech is news, say, like Jaffer's double century against the Windies, where all the newspapers have almost the same story to report.

What are the odds that a well known Kannada blogger and a Kannada newspaper discover the same speech of a long dead Yiddish writer independently of each other almost at the same time? We must say, not that very good. If we were of the betting kind, and had there been a bet about this, we definitely would have bet against it.

Note that, unlike Sriram's article, there is no context for Kannada Prabha to publish this speech except that it's interesting.

Did someone at Kannada Prabha read Sriram's article? We don't know. If they did, shouldn't they at least give some credit or make a reference to Sriram's blog? (We know that we are asking accusatory questions based purely on speculation. But, we are just a blog. Should we have higher standards than newspaers?! We know that it is not impossible that some one at Kannada Prabha chanced upon this speech. But what is the chance? While it is not impossible, it sure is improbable.)

It always amuses us -- we at 108 Sullu World H.Q. are easily amused -- to see these kinds of antics at our esteemed newspapers. We then start wondering whether these are the works of nameless ghosts or Harvard juniors with names who use their photographic memories to internalize the things that they read.

Tail pieces:

• For some unknown reason, the ghost that translated Singer's speech for Kannada Prabha does not like the word "Yiddish". In his speech Singer uses the word "Yiddish" 8 times. But it appears not even once in the Kannada Prabha translation.
• By the using the phrase "ಯಿದ್ದಿಷ್ ಭಾಷೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಬರೆಯುವ ಕತೆಗಾರ" the Kannada Prabha piece leaves the impression that Singer is not dead. That could be just a typo. Or, an oversight. Or, Singer's ghost could be the one that's writing for Kannada Prabha.
• Compared to Sriram's translation, Kannada Prabha's translation uses conversational Kannada.

Want to read a third translation? Even more colloquial? Here it is:

"ಅಲ್ಲ..ರೀ.. ಆಗ್ಲೋ ಈಗ್ಲೋ ಅಂತಿರೋ ಭಾಷೆಲಿ ಬರೀತೀರಲ್ಲ ನೀವು, ಯಾಕೆ?"

ಅಂತ ಸುಮಾರು ಜನ ನನ್ನ ಕೇಳ್ತಾನೇ ಇರ್ತಾರೆ. ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಆನ್ಸರ್ರು ಒಂಚೂರು ಎಕ್ಸ್‌ಪ್ಲೇಯ್ನ್ ಮಾಡಿಬಿಡ್ತೀನಿ.

ಫಸ್ಟಫಾಲ್ ನಂಗೆ ದೆವ್ವದ ಕತೆ ಬರೆಯೋದು ಅಂದ್ರೆ ಸಕ್ಕತ್ ಇಷ್ಟ ಜೊತೇಗೆ ದೆವ್ವದ್ ವಿಷ್ಯ ಬರ್ಯಕ್ಕೆ ಇನ್ನೇನು ಗೊಟಕ್ ಅನ್ನೋ ಲಾಂಗ್ವೇಜೇ ಬೆಟರ್ ಅನ್ಸುತ್ತೆ. ಲಾಂಗ್ವೇಜ್ ಸತ್ತಷ್ಟೂ ದೆವ್ವ ಲೈವ್ಲೀ ಆಗುತ್ತೆ. ಯಿಡ್ಡಿಷ್ ಅಂದ್ರೆ ದೆವ್ವಗಳು ಪ್ರಾಣಾನೇ ಬಿಡುತ್ವೆ. ನಂಗೊತ್ತಿರೋ ಪ್ರಕಾರ ಅವೆಲ್ಲಾ ಮಾತಾಡೋದು ಅದ್ರಲ್ಲೇ.

ಸೆಕೆಂಡಾಗಿ, ನನ್ಗೆ ದೆವ್ವಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಅಷ್ಟೇ ಅಲ್ಲ ನಂಬ್ಕೆ ಇರೋದು, ಅವು ತಿರ್ಗಿ ಎದ್ ಬರುತ್ವೇ ಅಂತಾನೂ ನಂಬ್ಕೆ ಇದೆ. ಶ್ಯೂರಾಗಿ ಹೇಳ್ತೀನಿ, ಒಂದಲ್ಲಾ ಒಂದು ದಿವಸ, ಲಕ್ಷಾಂತರ ಯಿಡ್ಡಿಷ್ ಮಾತಾಡೋ ಡೆಡ್ ಬಾಡೀಸ್ ಸಮಾಧಿಗಳಿಂದ ಎದ್ದು ಬರೋದು ಗ್ಯಾರಂಟಿ. ಅವಾಗ, ಅವು ಕೇಳೋ ಫಸ್ಟ್ ಕ್ವೆಶ್ಚನ್: "ಯಾವ್ದಾದ್ರೂ ಹೊಸ ಯಿಡ್ಡಿಷ್ ಬುಕ್ ಇದ್ಯಾ ಓದಕ್ಕೆ?"

ಮೂರ್ನೇದು, ಟೂ ಥೌಸಂಡ್ ಯಿಯರ್ಸ್ ಹೀಬ್ರೂನ ಟಿಕೆಟ್ ತೊಗೊಂಡಿರೋ ಭಾಷೆ ಅಂತಿದ್ರು. ಸಡನ್ನಾಗಿ ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಲೈಫ್ ಬಂದ್ ಬಿಡ್ತು. ಹೀಬ್ರೂಗಾಗಿದ್ದು ಇವತ್ತಲ್ಲಾ ನಾಳೆ ಯಿಡ್ಡಿಷ್‍ಗೂ ಅಗ್ಬೋದು. (ಆದ್ರೆ, ಅದು ಹೆಂಗ್ ಆಗುತ್ತೆ ಅಂತ ನಂಗೆ ಒಂಚೂರೂ ಐಡಿಯಾ ಇಲ್ಲ.)

ನಾನು ಯಿಡ್ಡಿಷ್ ಬಿಡ್ದೇ ಇರಕ್ಕೆ ನಾಲ್ಕನೇದಾಗಿ ಒಂದು ಪುಟ್ ರೀಸನ್ನೂ ಇದೆ. ಅದು ಯಾವ್ದಪ್ಪಾ ಅಂದ್ರೆ: ಯಿಡ್ಡಿಷ್ ಹರೋ-ಹರ ಅಂತಿರ್ಬಹುದು, ಆದ್ರೆ ನಂಗೆ ಚೆನ್ನಾಗ್ ಬರೋದು ಅದೊಂದೆ. ಯಿಡ್ಡಿಷ್ ನನ್ನ ಮದರ್ ಟಂಗು ಆಂಡ್ ಮದರ್ ಕಭಿ ನಹಿ ಮರ್‍ತೀ.

If you have Mangalore-Kannada, Dharvad-Kannada, Mukhya Mantri Chandru- Kannada translations of the above, please do send us.

ಸೂರ್ಯಂಗೇ ಟಾರ್ಚ್ ..?!

We can't say we are particularly fond of writing about ourselves. But, then again, it's not everyday that people of eminence are talking about us. Forget about people of eminence. It's not everyday that any one is talking about us.

We hope that you will excuse our exploitation of the 15 minutes of our fame to its last second.

Mr.Belagere's article about our blog has generated a few responses. One among them being our own. You can read all of them here.

Caste-ing Aspersions

A few weeks back we read an article in The Outlook. You can read it here. (Requires Registration).

The sub-head of the article asks the following question:

Promoted to RBI dy governor, then demoted. Is his caste the issue?

What is it about? It is about Dr.R.B.Barman an executive director of RBI who was first elevated to the post of deputy governor of RBI and later "demoted" back to his original designation.

Why?
As per the report itself, one or more of the following could be the reasons:

One view is that he was not adept at "political manoeuvering, lobbying and promoting himself"—at least until he was publicly humiliated—and this led to his being sidelined. Another contention is that he was ignored because there was no precedent for a statistician to rise to the position of deputy governor. A third charitable one is that the RBI made a genuine mistake. Finally, sources close to Barman claim that he was a victim of RBI's inner politics.

In retrospect, it appears that Reddy elevated Barman "in his personal capacity" without following the proper appointment procedure.

So, where's the "caste" here, you ask?! Good question. We wish we knew the answer.

As per the report, Dr.Barman belongs to a "scheduled caste" and some nameless "sources contend that one of the reasons why he was sidelined may be because of his scheduled caste background".

Yes. That's it. "may be"!

That's all is needed for the good editors at The Outlook to see the caste as "the issue". It does not matter that Dr.Barman's own letter to the governor of RBI (as quoted in the Outlook report itself) does not make any such allegation. It also does not matter in the whole sequence of events as reported by the Outlook itself, there is nothing to indicate that the caste played any role.

So, who were the people who discriminated against Dr.Barman because of his caste, you ask? Again a good question. Did the nameless "sources" name anyone? We don't know. The Outlook certainly does not name anyone.

Yes, we agree that Dr.Barman seems to have been treated shabbily. But, was that because of his caste? Doesn't the Outlook need to establish a few more relevant facts before casting aspersions?

ಬೆಳಗೆರೆಯ ಮನದಲ್ಲಿ .. ನೂರೆಂಟುಸುಳ್ಳು!

Dear Readers,

We are baa...aack. We are not sure for how long though. But, for now, we are here.

It's party time at 108 Sullu World H.Q. We have been noticed!

First Sudha takes a note of us. Thanks mainly to Pavanaja and Sriram.
Then, Ravi Belagere writes about us. Want to know what he has to say? You know what to do here.

Regards,

"Sanjaya"